Daunte Wright shooting Brooklyn MN

[Joe in PNG]

Okay, that's what I thought.
The point I was making earlier - that I wasn't directing at anyone in particular. I just found it funny, because some folks here have some cognitive dissonance regarding mob rule and anarchy.

When the mob is mad about a citizen being wrongfully shot by a police officer, i.e. a violation of that citizen's rights, the politicians who cave to the mob are wrong.

When the mob is mad about violation of a citizen's rights (gun laws) and the politicians don't cave to the mob, then the politicians who don't cave are wrong.

When is the mob wrong? (This is rhetorical...)

Short answer- when they start burning and destroying things that don't belong to them.

[wvincent]

Short answer- when they start burning and destroying things that don't belong to them.

When the Dollar Tree becomes the "Free Tree".

[Bergeron]

A suspect with a history of having guns on him illegally, who dives back into the car after realizing he's about to be placed under arrest, could be up to anything. Could be going to put the car in drive and flee. Or could be going for that weapon to practice the Mozambique drill on the officer's face.

If you don't remember this particular incident below, it was discussed before in a different thread. Watch it all the way through and you'll see the similarities.

Tulsa shooting of two police officers

I certainly fault her for shooting someone with a lethal weapon when she meant to use a non-lethal.

But was she wrong to be hyped up? That area of operations could very bad for all we know.

You're of course very correct that the situation the officer was in could have very easily escalated, and was already real bad. It matters to have a cool head and awareness in situations using force, and the lack of that has made a bad situation much worse. I do think that training and experience are needed to get to that "cool head and awareness in situations using force" and that the officer was failed by a lack training and experience.

Back when, I took a Professional Ethics class that discussed blame and liability. The prof pointed out that the most common real outcome was that every party involved usually had some measure of blame, and that it was the duty of courts and the justice system to work and approportion that blame. In that sense, the officer has blame because she pointed a gun at the decedent, not realizing it was a gun, and killed him with it. I think that the department probably has blame for insufficiently training the officer. I think that the decedent has blame for resisting lawful arrest. I think that the decedent also has blame in establishing for himself a history as a violent criminal, and having a warrant out for his arrest.

I think that the courts and justice system could come up with some sort of satisfactory analysis and awarding of responsibility to all the involved parties, but I think that is the one thing the mob most desperately wants to prevent. Mobs are the opposite of civil, productive, lawful society.

[RevolverRob]

Disagree with both your initial assessment...and your conclusion where you're equating a procedural and judgmental error by an individual with tragic results, i.e. a mistake, with the willful and intentional denial of rights.

Not the same thing.

Concur they aren't the same.

What is the same is that threats of violence against politicians (mob rule) results in rash decisions like this. Whether that mob's assemblage is based on a legitimate grievance or an illegitimate grievance, the result is one that circumvents the process.

[blues]

Concur they aren't the same.

What is the same is that threats of violence against politicians (mob rule) results in rash decisions like this. Whether that mob's assemblage is based on a legitimate grievance or an illegitimate grievance, the result is one that circumvents the process.

You didn't define how the mob's violence was directed, whether against politicians themselves, or against property, or other citizens.

The topic has more nuance than these few sentences and the example you provided earlier allow for.

For example, are we saying "the process" is sacrosanct? Or are there exceptions? I'd argue, as I'm sure you would, that when slavery was legal, fighting it extrajudicially could be justified by any number of metrics.

I'm sure we agree much more than we disagree, but I just want things to be clearer than sophistry might otherwise convey on its face, especially to others who may read these posts and move on.

[RJ]

MEANwhile...back on topic...

Local man interviewed by CNN not happy with the media(warning: colorful language)

[Totem Polar]

...stuff pointing out the tragically absurd, and the absurdly hypocritical...

Oh, FFS.

[LittleLebowski]

would weapons be needed if they're arresting someone with a warrant?

Btw, here's my foolproof method to not get shot by the police: If the cops want to arrest you, don't fight or flee. Peaceful protests would end and world peace would ensue if people followed this one very simple rule. This rule applies to all people, so city councils around the world can embrace its equity without guilt or the taint of privilege.

how long have you been sitting on this groundbreaking discovery?!

[MickAK]

Everyone is focusing on the mistaken Taser aspect but what's standing out to me is how incredibly bad the officers are at handling an angry human. This isn't the first time I've noticed this, and I'm curious how common this is. It stood out to me in the Atlanta shooting and it's standing out even harder on this one. The guys hands are behind his back and he's a good distance from the drivers seat and the officer getting ready to cuff him looks like he has ~40 lbs on the guy.

Is this a training trend or a mindset one or am I just noticing it because those are the videos that get seen?

[LittleLebowski]

Everyone is focusing on the mistaken Taser aspect but what's standing out to me is how incredibly bad the officers are at handling an angry human. This isn't the first time I've noticed this, and I'm curious how common this is. It stood out to me in the Atlanta shooting and it's standing out even harder on this one. The guys hands are behind his back and he's a good distance from the drivers seat and the officer getting ready to cuff him looks like he has ~40 lbs on the guy.

Is this a training trend or a mindset one or am I just noticing it because those are the videos that get seen?

I’m trying not sound like an asshole, but to me; it speaks volumes about her as an FTO. I wasn’t there, I’m not a cop, etc. For all I know, it was a soup sandwich that could have been solved with proper application of a tazer. I don’t know, but I’m willing to learn.